Chun v. New York Slide Fastener Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chun v. New York Slide Fastener Corp.

254 A.D.2d 93, 679 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10677

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D.2d 93 (Chun v. New York Slide Fastener Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chun v. New York Slide Fastener Corp., 254 A.D.2d 93, 679 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10677 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.), entered May 9, 1997, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s cause of action on the notes was properly dismissed where the notes were not issued or indorsed to him or to his order or to bearer or in blank (UCC 3-301, 1-201 [20]), and the purported assignment does not bear the assignor’s signature. We have considered plaintiff’s arguments that the complaint states causes of action for breach of contract, subrogation, contribution and indemnity, and find them to be without merit. Concur — Lerner, P. J., Sullivan, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.), entered May 9, 1997, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s cause of action on the notes was properly dismissed where the notes were not issued or indorsed to him or to his order or to bearer or in blank (UCC 3-301, 1-201 [20]), and the purported assignment does not bear the assignor’s signature. We have considered plaintiff’s arguments that the complaint states causes of action for breach of contract, subrogation, contribution and indemnity, and find them to be without merit. Concur — Lerner, P. J., Sullivan, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 93, 679 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chun-v-new-york-slide-fastener-corp-nyappdiv-1998.